I have not read many posts about the Cal Bears but I found this one to be very detailed and insightful. I root for the Utah Utes. I wish we had this kind of serious analysis of our games.
What game did you watch? There is absolutely no qb competition. Mendoza played very well the second half. Chander Rogers sucks and is an instant drive killer
Nice article but disagree on the QB analysis. Mendoza was far and away the better option. He started 7/8 for about 80 yards then doesn’t play again until the start of 3rd. Easily could have scored at least another 2 touchdowns if Mendoza plays the entire game. Seems like Wilcox is trying to create a QB controversy when it’s an easy call.
hopefully it's a smokescreen for Auburn's sake bc at today's presser, he hasn't changed the diverted from the same non-answer... which I guess is fine as long as it's actually a smokescreen.
Great recap. Although I would contend that the QB competition was not as close as this analysis would imply. Even if we put aside Mendoza (much better) counting stats, looking at the individual plays bears out the same story. When rewatching the condensed game footage above, you can see that both times Rogers chose to run on 3rd down, there were receivers either open or about to be open. On one hand, Nando got more opportunities to make good plays. On the other hand, a not insignificant reason for that is that he was able to find receivers past the sticks whereas Rogers was quick to scramble.
Small note: Ott ran in two TDs before the unfortunate event, not one.
What concerns me is the 2.7 yard rushing average. Even though several guys were injured/held out, that was pretty weak.
D looked good all around, lack of pressure being the perennial weak spot. 3 INTs is pretty sweet.
Special teams certainly improved. Based on previous performances, best placekicker Cal has had in a Long time. All kickoffs were touchbacks, and a return TD to boot!
Mendoza was solid. I’m sure they just wanted to get some minutes for Rogers, so I’m sure we’re not facing a musical QBs situation. Rogers didn’t look super amazing, so Mendoza is definitely QB1
Yes. Something was learn. That Cal is not ready for primetime football. Yes the team had injuries before and during the game but, We got our butts kick from UC Davis for good part of this game. What plays does Wilcox have that He doesn't want to show. Auburn has game film from LY to determine how to play Cal. If our OL and DL couldn't push UCD around what do you expect against Auburn and the ACC. As you stated We don't know if Ott is okay. Even if he 80 or 90 percent, We will have to play out of minds to give us a chance in staying and winning the game. I will remain positive, hopeful and faithful but, realistic in all our future games.
Auburn has last years game films but we have a new OC and he didn't show anything that isn't basic football. I hope the D was doing the same. When all the injured come back and with more execution of plays in practice repetition, then I feel Cal will look much better on offense.
The rotation of QB was preordained. At least now there is evidence on which way to go. If there is still a rotation going into Auburn, well......that would be disconcerting.
We won, right? Ok beyond the sturm und drang or what could/should have happened, I'm happier than the alternative...onward! Go Bears! Lots to build on per Avi's analysis...wish it was a no brainer blow out, but WTF, we won, right?
The noted track record of unimpressive FCS wins in the Wilcox Era makes me think that this game didn't mean much of anything. It's just par for the course, whether we're going to have a good Wilcox year or a bad one.
My dollar opinion.... I understand, that teams like UC Davis, you want to try certain situations before you have to play tougher games, but why not soften up their offense and defense by making their qb very uncomfortable by playing a simple base and blitzing (send the house first series) the hell out of qb. Correct me if I am wrong but we didn't start blitzing til later in the game. That should have been KEEP IT SIMPLE, dbs play zone 2 or 3, so kids can gain confidence and settle down. All that defensive stunting can wait later in the game, simple base. That's it. On offense, stop all that passing because your keeping their DL fresh and the other guys start saying "we can play with these guys". The first series snap Ott gets 5yds running, then a pass on 2nd down, then its 3rd swing pass to the flat, drive is dead, WHY? Run the ball! Just run the ball right at them til you wear them down (we have the line to do it). Then, call plays based on situations you like to run for future games. Ones and some two's, should have never played as long as they did. I hope Chancellor Lyons is watching! Eight years, its time to start having winning records, too much money at stake! This game should have been a blow out! Its tiring watching bad football, (not talent) year after year.
Totally agree. Barring the appearance of some absolute prodigy or Carson Beck via transfer, it seems obvious the Bears should work to develop Mendoza, who proved one of the elements on offense which DID work last season. Not sure why they're messing around here.
not to mention that even if Rogers showed to be the same or slightly better than Nando (he hasn't IMO), he's here for 1 year... if it's even close it's a no-brained to go with Nando.
In the post-game presser, Wilcox said that the secondary trouble in the first half was from poor technique (leverage). I was surprised how much better the coverage was in the second half, sounds loke it was just a small coaching adjustment.
I'm most worried about the O and D lines. They should have dominated the Aggies, but were at best equal to them.
Fernando looked good. Way better than Rogers. But it's early. Our O-Line was terrible. They were ineffective for our run game; they didn't open holes or block to second level. Davis recognized this and brought pressure, plugging gaps and going after our QB's and daring them to complete a deep ball. Unitl our o-line can play decently the season is going to be tough. I'm surprised at how many of our guys are dinged up so early, especially with how careful we practice. Maybe that's the reason why. We are so gentle on the day to day to they don't get beat up in practice that come game time they aren't ready for it. Having two starting receivers out, maybe our starting running back, and a bunch of o-linemen, is not a recipe for success. I was please to see our D tighten the screws in the second half. Our D-linemen did a good job as did our ILB's. We needed our DB's to clamp down and tackle better as well and in the second half they did. A couple of thoughts: 1. Had we played Mendoza the entire game and not stopped our scoring, we would have scored 14 to 21 more points. 2. Davis is a way better team than Alabama A&M who Auburn played and ran up the score on (totally low class in my book). Right now I give them the edge, but hopefully our real Golden Bears show up from the beginning next week.
Auburn tried not to run the score up...the second, third, and fourth string were in for Auburn a majority of the game and Auburn even shaved 10 minutes of time off the game (playing 10 minute 3rd and 4th quarters) in order to shorten the game. Is Auburn supposed to kneel the ball 3 times and punt every time they get the ball?
I am lowkey concerned about the whole "well that's football!" approach to injury prevention our team seems to have... seems like S&C might be the next area of concern we need to address. There have actually been advancements in the that field and we should make sure we're implementing CURRENT best practices so we're not losing guys for the season before the first snap of the year.
I mean, most of the injuries were before the game. Having 3 injuries in a game (Ott, Calloway, Brady) is not uncommon. No excuses for the oline against an FCS team. You should be able to play 3rd stringers and win handily.
I'll disagree a little. Losing three guys in your first game while having a number of guys already injured is not common. As to beating Davis with third stingers, never would happen. Davis has a few players that could start at FBS level and a number of starters who would be solid FBS back ups. They have talent, just not the overall size and depth. I knew the start of this game would be tough. Now if we played some of the FCS patsies out there that other teams played and won by 70+ points, then yes, third string should beat them. But the top 20 FCS programs can beat a decent FBS team on a good day.
I have not read many posts about the Cal Bears but I found this one to be very detailed and insightful. I root for the Utah Utes. I wish we had this kind of serious analysis of our games.
Well done.
What game did you watch? There is absolutely no qb competition. Mendoza played very well the second half. Chander Rogers sucks and is an instant drive killer
Nice article but disagree on the QB analysis. Mendoza was far and away the better option. He started 7/8 for about 80 yards then doesn’t play again until the start of 3rd. Easily could have scored at least another 2 touchdowns if Mendoza plays the entire game. Seems like Wilcox is trying to create a QB controversy when it’s an easy call.
hopefully it's a smokescreen for Auburn's sake bc at today's presser, he hasn't changed the diverted from the same non-answer... which I guess is fine as long as it's actually a smokescreen.
Let’s hope. I do worry that promises were made and/or NIL $ are playing a role in the decision. Like I said it’s a pretty easy choice. We’ll see.
Great recap. Although I would contend that the QB competition was not as close as this analysis would imply. Even if we put aside Mendoza (much better) counting stats, looking at the individual plays bears out the same story. When rewatching the condensed game footage above, you can see that both times Rogers chose to run on 3rd down, there were receivers either open or about to be open. On one hand, Nando got more opportunities to make good plays. On the other hand, a not insignificant reason for that is that he was able to find receivers past the sticks whereas Rogers was quick to scramble.
Small note: Ott ran in two TDs before the unfortunate event, not one.
What concerns me is the 2.7 yard rushing average. Even though several guys were injured/held out, that was pretty weak.
D looked good all around, lack of pressure being the perennial weak spot. 3 INTs is pretty sweet.
Special teams certainly improved. Based on previous performances, best placekicker Cal has had in a Long time. All kickoffs were touchbacks, and a return TD to boot!
Mendoza was solid. I’m sure they just wanted to get some minutes for Rogers, so I’m sure we’re not facing a musical QBs situation. Rogers didn’t look super amazing, so Mendoza is definitely QB1
Hopefully, you’re right that Cal held back and did just enough to win. We’ll learn more over the next three weeks.
Yes. Something was learn. That Cal is not ready for primetime football. Yes the team had injuries before and during the game but, We got our butts kick from UC Davis for good part of this game. What plays does Wilcox have that He doesn't want to show. Auburn has game film from LY to determine how to play Cal. If our OL and DL couldn't push UCD around what do you expect against Auburn and the ACC. As you stated We don't know if Ott is okay. Even if he 80 or 90 percent, We will have to play out of minds to give us a chance in staying and winning the game. I will remain positive, hopeful and faithful but, realistic in all our future games.
Auburn has last years game films but we have a new OC and he didn't show anything that isn't basic football. I hope the D was doing the same. When all the injured come back and with more execution of plays in practice repetition, then I feel Cal will look much better on offense.
The rotation of QB was preordained. At least now there is evidence on which way to go. If there is still a rotation going into Auburn, well......that would be disconcerting.
Let's hope that's the last we see as a rotation! IMO it's easier for the players to focus on their job if they each know their roles.
We won, right? Ok beyond the sturm und drang or what could/should have happened, I'm happier than the alternative...onward! Go Bears! Lots to build on per Avi's analysis...wish it was a no brainer blow out, but WTF, we won, right?
The noted track record of unimpressive FCS wins in the Wilcox Era makes me think that this game didn't mean much of anything. It's just par for the course, whether we're going to have a good Wilcox year or a bad one.
My dollar opinion.... I understand, that teams like UC Davis, you want to try certain situations before you have to play tougher games, but why not soften up their offense and defense by making their qb very uncomfortable by playing a simple base and blitzing (send the house first series) the hell out of qb. Correct me if I am wrong but we didn't start blitzing til later in the game. That should have been KEEP IT SIMPLE, dbs play zone 2 or 3, so kids can gain confidence and settle down. All that defensive stunting can wait later in the game, simple base. That's it. On offense, stop all that passing because your keeping their DL fresh and the other guys start saying "we can play with these guys". The first series snap Ott gets 5yds running, then a pass on 2nd down, then its 3rd swing pass to the flat, drive is dead, WHY? Run the ball! Just run the ball right at them til you wear them down (we have the line to do it). Then, call plays based on situations you like to run for future games. Ones and some two's, should have never played as long as they did. I hope Chancellor Lyons is watching! Eight years, its time to start having winning records, too much money at stake! This game should have been a blow out! Its tiring watching bad football, (not talent) year after year.
Im not sure why we are playing qb musical chairs again-Fernando gave us spark last year and we should be building on that
Totally agree. Barring the appearance of some absolute prodigy or Carson Beck via transfer, it seems obvious the Bears should work to develop Mendoza, who proved one of the elements on offense which DID work last season. Not sure why they're messing around here.
not to mention that even if Rogers showed to be the same or slightly better than Nando (he hasn't IMO), he's here for 1 year... if it's even close it's a no-brained to go with Nando.
In the post-game presser, Wilcox said that the secondary trouble in the first half was from poor technique (leverage). I was surprised how much better the coverage was in the second half, sounds loke it was just a small coaching adjustment.
I'm most worried about the O and D lines. They should have dominated the Aggies, but were at best equal to them.
I laughed a bit too loudly at this headline. Spot on analysis as usual, Avinash.
Fernando looked good. Way better than Rogers. But it's early. Our O-Line was terrible. They were ineffective for our run game; they didn't open holes or block to second level. Davis recognized this and brought pressure, plugging gaps and going after our QB's and daring them to complete a deep ball. Unitl our o-line can play decently the season is going to be tough. I'm surprised at how many of our guys are dinged up so early, especially with how careful we practice. Maybe that's the reason why. We are so gentle on the day to day to they don't get beat up in practice that come game time they aren't ready for it. Having two starting receivers out, maybe our starting running back, and a bunch of o-linemen, is not a recipe for success. I was please to see our D tighten the screws in the second half. Our D-linemen did a good job as did our ILB's. We needed our DB's to clamp down and tackle better as well and in the second half they did. A couple of thoughts: 1. Had we played Mendoza the entire game and not stopped our scoring, we would have scored 14 to 21 more points. 2. Davis is a way better team than Alabama A&M who Auburn played and ran up the score on (totally low class in my book). Right now I give them the edge, but hopefully our real Golden Bears show up from the beginning next week.
Auburn tried not to run the score up...the second, third, and fourth string were in for Auburn a majority of the game and Auburn even shaved 10 minutes of time off the game (playing 10 minute 3rd and 4th quarters) in order to shorten the game. Is Auburn supposed to kneel the ball 3 times and punt every time they get the ball?
I am lowkey concerned about the whole "well that's football!" approach to injury prevention our team seems to have... seems like S&C might be the next area of concern we need to address. There have actually been advancements in the that field and we should make sure we're implementing CURRENT best practices so we're not losing guys for the season before the first snap of the year.
I mean, most of the injuries were before the game. Having 3 injuries in a game (Ott, Calloway, Brady) is not uncommon. No excuses for the oline against an FCS team. You should be able to play 3rd stringers and win handily.
I'll disagree a little. Losing three guys in your first game while having a number of guys already injured is not common. As to beating Davis with third stingers, never would happen. Davis has a few players that could start at FBS level and a number of starters who would be solid FBS back ups. They have talent, just not the overall size and depth. I knew the start of this game would be tough. Now if we played some of the FCS patsies out there that other teams played and won by 70+ points, then yes, third string should beat them. But the top 20 FCS programs can beat a decent FBS team on a good day.
Ask Oregon.
We are about to find out a whole lot about this program in 6 days